3. Telegram From the Department of State to the Embassy in Guatemala1

59477. Subject: Guatemalan Foreign Minister’s Call on the Secretary.

1. This telegram is based on an uncleared memorandum of conversation and is subject to revision.

2. Foreign Minister Molina called on the Secretary on March 14. The Minister gave a detailed historical analysis of the Belize dispute, tracing the problem back to colonial times. He said that the U.S. had been involved previously as a mediator (1965–68) and it was Guatemala’s opinion that all parties would welcome another U.S. effort, especially if negotiations now underway proved unsuccessful. In the interim, he asked the U.S. to help persuade the British to be more accomodating. The Minister emphasized that Guatemala could not accept Belizean independence without some territorial cession and that the situation could become explosive in the future. The Secretary replied that we were well aware of the problem and that the British had recently mentioned it to us again.2 We understood that OAS Secretary General Orfila was attempting to be helpful in the matter. The Secretary said that we will look at the problem and will talk to Orfila but we were not in a position to promise anything. Amb Todman added that the U.S. had stayed out of active involvement in the matter since the late 1960’s because we believed that agreement among all the parties directly involved was the only way to achieve a permanent solution.

3. The Foreign Minister then mentioned the cargo preference case pending before the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC).3 The Secre[Page 8]tary said that we faced similar problems with a number of countries. He added that we were looking at the U.S. legislation to determine if it needed to be changed. The administration had not yet taken a position on the question. The Commerce Department was taking the lead in examining the matter. The Secretary asked Ambassador Todman to inquire if a further postponement of FMC action would be possible until the administration could determine if a change in legislation was needed. Molina said that the FMC had given Guatemala a very short deadline to change their cargo preference practices. Changing the law was very difficult, thus he was asking for an extension of the deadline and proposed a working group from the two countries to consider the matter. F.Y.I. We are considering this matter urgently. We suggest that in your meeting with the President Friday4 you attempt to downplay the possibility of the FMC agreeing to any lengthy postponement. It may well prove that no further delay is possible. End F.Y.I.

4. The Foreign Minister then raised the subject of our human rights reports. He said that Guatemala would probably be joined by others in Latin America in rejecting military assistance that was tied to unilateral judgments by the U.S. about matters considered to be the internal affair of sovereign nations. Guatemala agreed with the U.S. objective but thought that a multilateral approach, perhaps involving some type of tribunal to hear cases of alleged abuses, would be better. In that way, governments would get a chance to defend themselves. The Foreign Minister also objected to what he termed inaccuracies and hearsay in our report. This included the use of comments by such groups as Amnesty International. Ambassador Todman said that he wanted to know about any inaccuracies. However, the legislation required the inclusion in our reports of comments by groups such as Amnesty International. The Secretary added that the administration’s commitment to human rights was very deep. We appreciated constructive suggestions. He said that both the Executive and the Congress were considering how best to proceed in the future to make our human rights policy a constructive one.

Vance
  1. Source: National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, D770092–0045. Secret; Immediate. Sent for information Priority to London and Belize City. Drafted by Platt, cleared in S, S/S, and EB/TT/MA; approved by Todman. A revised version, or other substantive record of conversation, has not been found.
  2. In telegram 37044 to multiple posts, February 17, Luers informed Boster that British Minister Moreton had noted that the negotiations with Guatemala over Belizean independence were heading toward a potential confrontation over the territorial issue and that London had instructed him to get a reading from the Carter administration on the issue. (National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, D770057–0966) During a March 11 meeting in the Secretary’s conference room, British Foreign Secretary Owen asked Vance for support on the Belize issue. Vance replied that he was hesitant to “get involved” but would “stay in touch on the subject.” (Memorandum of Conversation, Washington, March 11; Department of State, Office of the Secretariat Staff, Cyrus R. Vance, Secretary of State, 1977–1980, Lot 84D241, Exdis 1977 Memorandum of Conversation for Secretary Vance.)
  3. The case dealt with Guatemala’s attempts to legislate preferences for Guatemalan flag lines in maritime commerce with the United States. The Federal Maritime Commission viewed Guatemala’s policy as discriminatory. See telegram 53381 to Guatemala City, March 10. (National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, D770083–0311)
  4. March 18.